Opiniones de usuarios

Greetings again from the darkness. In the United States, we typically get limited access to the films of Israel. In recent years, there have been two that I like very much: The Band's Visit, and Waltz for Bashir. Written and directed by Joseph Cedar, Footnote was nominated for the Best Foreign Language Academy Award. It's a very creative and insightful story utilizing slight comedic elements to show the destructive forces of petty professional jealousy within a family.

Most parents wish for true happiness for their children. If the professional success of their offspring far exceeds their own ... it is a reason to swell with parental pride. But what happens when father and son choose similar paths? What happens when animosity builds as the father's life work (30 years of research) is deemed unnecessary and irrelevant? What happens when the son becomes publicly revered and adored for his populist writing? Well, in the case of father Eliezer (Shlomo Bar-Aba) and son Uriel (Lior Ashkenazi), we get strained relations and a thesis on the pitfalls of pride and ego.

All of that is sufficiently fascinating for a story, but here we get an even more severe test of human nature. The father is erroneously informed that he has won the prestigious Israel Award, providing vindication and meaning to his work and well, his being. See, the award was supposed to go to the other Professor Shkolnik ... yes, his son. This much is shown in the trailer, but the true guts of this story is what happens after this mistake.

There are a few tremendous scenes in the film, but two really jumped out for me. In an early scene, the son is receiving yet another reward and he is attempting to provide some credit for his father's inspiration. However, the words seem to add credence to the irrelevancy instead. The best part? The camera never leaves the face of the father and he sits quietly listening in immeasurable pain. The other scene takes place in a beyond cramped meeting room for the Award committee to discuss the mistake with Uriel. The manner it is filmed and the choreography more than make up for the fact that the group of brilliant people never thought to find a more suitable meeting place.

The score of the film is one that I would appreciate more without having the film playing. The music is wonderful, but often distracting to the moment. It is interesting to note how it changes along with the posture and walking pace of Eliezer after he is informed of his award. One need not be an academic researcher or writer to understand the damaged relationship between father and son ... and how it has impacted wives, mothers and sons. That's a story that is painful in any language.

Footnote, one of the five nominees for Best Foreign Language films at the Oscars earlier this year, boasts two extraordinary performances. And it's absolutely vital that those two performances are pitch perfect, because the key to the film's drama and tension lies in those particular characters.

The premise is fairly straightforward. A father and son are both philogy professors at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Eliezer Shkolnik is an old school researcher who believes findings are only valid if research is conducted in the proper scientific method, while his son, Uriel, follows the more modern philosophy. Eliezer loathes the popularity and acceptance of the current methods, and is so stubborn he even refuses to cancel one of his classes even though only one student is signed.

Having background on research methods or philology is not necessary however, when it comes to following along the movie. Shlomo Bar'aba and Lior Ashkenazi, as Eliezer and Uriel respectively, both make sure to humanize their characters and portray their conflicting ideals by showcasing conflicting personalities as wells.

The plot gets really interesting when Eliezer finds out he has been voted the winner of the Israel Prize, forcing him to rethink how he feels his colleagues, and the field in general. However, Uriel soon gets a phone call that will shake things up even more.

Unfortunately, Footnote does not deliver a satisfying conclusion, at least not a memorable one. The tension is slowly built up really well as the film cuts deeper into the plot, yet when the time comes for a huge clash, the film ends up kinds of just floating around not knowing the right time to fade out. However, the meat of the film is too good to be ignored, as both Bar'aba and Ashkenazi deliver performances you won't soon forget.

One thing that has become common in American popular culture - if you can call it culture - is to have all sorts of salacious family feuds. That makes it all the more satisfying to see Joseph Cedar's "Hearat Shulayim" ("Footnote" in English). The movie focuses on a father and son, both of whom are professors at the Talmudic Research department of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Despite the father's extensive studies, the Israel Prize committee refuses to recognize his work, while the son has garnered a lot of respect. One day, the father receives a call announcing that he's winning the prize. There's just one problem: the committee meant to call the son.

The movie makes sure to avoid tabloid-style situations. It takes a serious approach to the situation. Probably the most effective scene is when the son meets the Israel Prize committee in a cramped office and reminds them of the hypocrisy of their decision to deny his father the prize. Nonetheless, the tension between father and son remains. In the end, it's a really good movie. I haven't seen many Israeli movies, but now I would like to.

FOOTNOTE is an appropriately titled sparklingly intelligent and entertaining film written and directed by Joseph Cedar. With a small cast and a focused story this little film form Israel is not only a pleasure to watch as a story performed as shared by brilliant actors, but it is also one of the most visually artistic and creative venture of cinematography to be on the small screen in a long time: the genius cinematographer is Yaron Scharf. Add to this a musical score that enhances every moment of the story - courtesy of composer Amit Poznansky - and the film simply succeeds on every level.

In a most ingenious way we are introduced to the two main characters - father and son, both professors in the Talmud department of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The film opens on the confused and somewhat unattached facial expression of the seated father Eliezer Shkolnik (Shlomo Bar Aba) as he listens to his ebullient son Uriel Shkolnik (Lior Ashkenazi) being inducted into the prestigious Israeli academic union. Uriel's acceptance speech reflects his childhood when his father informed him upon questioning that he was a 'teacher' - an occupation the young Uriel found embarrassing at the time, but now honors his father for this guidance. After the ceremony we slowly discover that there is a long-standing rivalry between father and son. Uriel has an addictive dependency on the embrace and accolades that the establishment provides, while Eliezer is a stubborn purist with a fear and profound revulsion for what the establishment stands for, yet beneath his contempt lies a desperate thirst for some kind of recognition: his only clam to fame after long years of intensive research is that the man who published his findings mentions Eliezer in a footnote. When it comes times for the Israel Prize, Israel's most prestigious national award, to be awarded, a clerical error results in a telephone call informing Eliezer that he has won, while in reality the award was meant for his son Uriel. How this error is resolved open all manner of windows for examining family relationships, fame, pure academia, and forgiveness.

The film is an unqualified success. Lior Ashkenazi (so well remembered from 'Walk on Water' and 'Late Marriage' among others) gives a bravura performance and that of Shlomo Ben Aba balances it in quality. The supporting cast is strong. Joseph Cedar has produced a fine film very much enhanced by the brilliance of the cinematography that tells the story as much as the dialogue.

Grady Harp

Joseph Cedar has written and directed a truly multifaceted film. "Footnote" is listed as a comedy, however, I found it to weigh more toward the dramatic side with a peppering of comedy that is well done and not overly utilized. The story is about a father and son who are prominent Talmudic scholars in Israel and who are competitive in the academic world where they both work. Shlomo Bar-Aba plays Eluezer Shkolnik the older of the two, and his performance is filled with struggle and empathy that pervades the film. The son is played by Lior Ashkenazi and he too provides a convincing portrayal as well. The family relationships are weighed heavily and transcend the entire movie which takes place in Academia. The film is rich in tradition, and the music complements it with great synchrony. The ending is abrupt, and it encourages some extra time thinking about the content. However, it also induces satisfaction in knowing that the cultural display of relationships and social intercourse are well documented on the screen. Some of the film dealing with comedy is not a belly splitter, but it is way of lightening the mood, and noted to be a well recognized mechanism of writing even in Shakespeare's writings. Although the relationship of the father and son is a strained one throughout the film, it also is a transcultural one that exudes with emotion and intellectual curiosity. This film is well worth a trip to the cinema or one can just wait for the Blu Ray DVD to be available.

This is a very good movie, but it could be better. The feel of the whole story very much reminded me of the Coen Brothers movie 'a serious man'. It has the same sense of general awkwardness in its characters. The story is very well told. It has a chapter structure and the parts of father and son have kind of symmetry to it, resulting in a feeling of bittersweet irony. If you like irony in all its layers and subtleties, then this is definitely something to watch. The one thing that could make this movie better in my opinion, is the climax that the whole movie is building up to, but which is left to your imagination. In my taste a little too much so, but decide for yourself!

The fictitious hero is a old man who takes himself and his work completely seriously-- to the exaggerated extent that we expect to find only in a fable. The screen displays to the audience a number of arch textual explanations about him and his son, and the audience chuckles at his eccentric single-mindedness. But a sort of tension appears as the characters' behavior slips outside the limits of the explanations. Is the old man cheating on his wife? What's behind his grandson's oblomovism? Eventually the movie focuses on an unknown that is stretched almost to the point of paradox: Is the quality of the old man's work in academe really unsurpassed, or is it really unsatisfactory? The movie does turn out to be a fable, and a fable worth taking seriously. It attracted an all-star cast, and Shlomo Bar-Abba, in the lead, continues the tradition of comedians who, when they undertake a dramatic role, gain additional impact from the contrast with their familiar persona. The movie received the 2011 screenplay award at Cannes.

Eliezer Shkolnik and his son Urien are both Talmudic researchers and professors in Jerusalem. Eliezer is bitter as his son receives wide acclaim from the Jewish Studies community. He spent most of his life working on a revolutionary take on an European version of the Talmud only to be scooped by an accidental discovery one month before publishing his own work. He toiled in his work alone. His class has one student. His most noteworthy accomplishment is a footnote in an important textbook. The father and son relationship has traveled a long and problematic road. Eliezer covets the Israel Prize above all else and one day, he gets a calls from the Minister of Education congratulating him. It is big news and then Uriel is told by the Ministry that the call was a mistake and he is the real winner. The head of the committee Grossman is an old foe of Eliezer.

This movie takes a small world and shows how the people in it treat this world as life and death. The opening sequence with Eliezer and the security guard is very compelling. Eliezer is a quietly bitter old man and that scene sets it all up. The problem is that he's not that charismatic as a character. Urien's struggles are more compelling. It's an intriguing premise but I don't find Eliezer lovable enough.

FOOTNOTE is the second Israeli film I've seen and while it felt rather insular in the cultural sense, it did explore some interesting themes and had a great sense of humor. The story is about a father and son, both professors of Talmudic literature. The father has largely been forgotten, his only significant achievement being a mention in a footnote in someone else's book, while his son is more celebrated. However, the dynamic between them changes when the father is selected (errantly) to receive the prestigious Israel Prize for his life's work. One thing the film does really well is explore the sometimes contentious relationship between parent and child. Eliezer (father) and Uriel (son) Shkolnik both have the same profession, yet the son's success in light of the father's failure certainly must have weighed heavily on both of their consciences. And when Eliezer is mistakenly nominated to receive the Israel Prize, his son comes to his defense since it would vindicate the decades of work for which he had previously gone unrecognized. There was also the subtle element of comedy and self-deprecating humor that seems to be part and parcel of the Jewish experience. It wasn't exactly laugh-out-loud hilarious, but there was some excellent situational humor as well as some ribbing on cutthroat competition in academia. Still, given the subject material it was a little hard for me to get into the film completely. The single element which I did connect with was the idea that a parent at some point might give up on their child, as I have had similar fears in the past. The film also had a somewhat unsatisfying ending, although it probably didn't have to show everything in order to be effective. The film was subversive enough without seeing what you know is coming. If there's one actual complaint I have, it's that the score was a little overpowering at times. Sometimes, more is less. Overall, the subject of academia is something that's a little too "inside baseball," particularly when it's about the Talmud (I'm not a Jew), but FOOTNOTE has some interesting themes that allow you a way into this story about a father-son rivalry.

Though Joseph Cedar's Footnote is a look at the Israeli academic community's insularity and hubris, the problems it raises are universal and the film could most likely take place anywhere in the world. One of five nominated films at this year's Oscars in the Best Foreign Film category, Footnote allows us to take a peak behind the hallowed walls of academia and it is not a pretty sight. With its exposure of political maneuvering, egotism, ambition, and tightly controlled orthodoxy, the film makes clear its point of view that professors who are out of the mainstream are marginalized and passed over for recognition by their peers.

The film centers on Eliezer Shkolnik (Schlomo Bar Aba), an aging Talmudic scholar and philologist, who has become a bitter and aggrieved man after having been passed over for the prestigious Israel Prize for twenty years. Eliezer arrogantly denounces the selection committee for the Prize as people who have forgotten the meaning of true scholarship. He has spent his career researching corrupted Jewish texts that deviate from the original Talmud, but whose only recognition has been a citation in a footnote.

Ill at ease in the hallowed walls of academia and in relationships in general, Eliezer sleeps in his office and only ventures out to go to the library. He continues to schedule classes even though as little as one or two people enroll. His relationship with his wife Yehudit (Alisa Rosen) appears strained and distant and, when he is at home, he blocks out the world by putting on gigantic yellow earphones. His behavior is contrasted with that of his more sociable and outgoing son, the bearded Uriel (Lior Ashkenazi) who is also a Talmudic scholar but one whose work is more attuned to popular tastes. His father, unfortunately, is generally disdainful, calling him a "folklorist" and a scholar subservient to the prevailing academic status quo.

The film opens with Eliezer sitting in an auditorium with a dour and rigid look on his face as Uriel is being inducted into a scholarly academy, an honor which the father has never received. Despite the downbeat beginning, the first part of the film is fairly lighthearted with Cedar entertaining us with inter-titles describing the background of the characters and Amelie-like cutesy cinematic tricks bouncily scored by Amit Poznansky. Halfway through, however, the film takes a more dramatic turn when Eliezer learns that he has finally won the Israel Prize after waiting for twenty years, an event that threatens the resentment he clings to so obsessively.

Unfortunately, a ridiculous faux-pas by the Nominating Committee only serves to place more obstacles in the father-son relationship. It is, unfortunately, not an easily correctable mistake but a true ethical dilemma and one that precipitates a confrontation between Uriel and the academic committee in a tiny room, an absurd scenario that would be funny if it did not have so many potential disastrous ramifications. The brunt of Uriel's attack is directed towards Yehuda Grossman (Michah Lewesohn), a scholar who has either rejected or ignored his father's work and whose publication of his own Talmudic discovery undermined all the meticulous research Eliezer had been doing for years. In the film's most dramatic sequence, the confrontation escalates into highly articulated personal attacks, ultimatums, and even a bit of physical violence.

While Uriel is defending his father at the committee meeting, Eliezer is doing the opposite, criticizing his son during an interview, lumping him in with those whose Talmudic studies he considers to be shallow and superficial. Needless to say, this even further exacerbates their troubled relationship. Footnote is an engaging film marked by exceptional performances by Lewesohn, Ashkenazi, and Bar Aba and you can enjoy it whether or not you care very much whether or not the current version of the Talmud correctly reflects the original ancient texts. The depiction of Eliezer, however, is one-dimensional and the father's incessant self-righteousness turns the film into a sour and mostly unpleasant affair. In addition to its depressing tone, numerous plot points are introduced and then dropped without further comment.

Eliezer is seen talking to another woman, a sequence that leads to a bedroom discussion of the event between Uriel and his wife Dikla (Alma Zack), but soon morphs into an argument, its purpose obscure. Also in another thread that goes nowhere except to add to the general unpleasantness, Uriel's son Josh (Daniel Markovich) goes on a hiking trip and comes home having to confront his father's anger at his ostensible lack of ambition or goals. Although the film's loose ends are particularly annoying, we are caught up in its very compelling scenario. Cedar knows how to build up the tension and we eagerly await some sort of resolution but, as is the trend of late, the director feels that his film is more valuable as a gigantic set-up than as a satisfying resolution and the result is a film that leaves us thinking that the projectionist inadvertently cut out the best part of the movie.

It's not like this is a bad movie but it's just one like dozens of others, that get made each year, mostly in Europa or as little art-house movies in America. When watching this movie I just couldn't help wondering what was supposed to be so special about it. In my opinion there is nothing special about it really but that of course does not make this a bad movie to watch as well.

It's simply an enjoyable and light little movie, that doesn't ever get too heavy handed, even though it could had easily gone that way. And I thank the movie for that but at the same time it's also giving too little in return.

The movie is taking a more comedy approach to its buildup but with as a problem that there isn't really any true comedy in this movie. It sort of reminded me of a Wes Anderson movie. They are supposed to be comical movies, without anything comical ever happening in it really. It's just not my favorite style of film-making but I know I'm probably a minority on this, so to most people, this won't be a complaint at all.

It's a movie with a good enough story, that ensures that the movie keeps going at all time. It's definitely not a boring movie to watch, despite of a slower type of approach at times.

I wasn't the biggest fan of its visual and technical approach though. I don't know, I guess I have just seen a bit too many movies like this already, so I'm sort of starting to get fed up with these type of movies looking all the same with its camera-handling and editing, that all should remind you of a more indie type of movie. I really did wish that this movie would bad done some more new and interesting stuff at times. That way I would had, no doubt, got more into the movie and would had found it more interesting and pleasant to watch all. It now instead is not a movie that I can wholeheartedly or enthusiastically recommend to you, since it just isn't ever doing anything special, with its story, characters or visuals.

Certainly not bad and still quite good for what it is but it's still a movie you could so easily do without.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

-- www.Ramascreen.com --

FOOTNOTE is an Israeli film that's Oscar-nominated this year for Foreign language category and I can see why it received the nod. It's quite possibly one of the funniest rivalry stories I've ever watched, and what makes the dilemma even more complicated is that it's between father and son. I think it's a well-made film, it's funny, it has its charms, you'll enjoy writer/director Joseph Cedar's way of telling you the backstories of each character, some of the scenes interestingly move like microform reel, those of us who didn't grow up knowing anything about Talmud or Jewish culture would get a slight education on one of some of the things they regard highly over there, but halfway through the film, it loses its attraction, it doesn't engage you enough, and ultimately it ends itself in somewhat of a tactless manner…

Eliezer is the father and Uriel is the son and they both share the same last name, and that's where the misunderstanding plays its card. Both individuals dabble in the same literature but the father is old-school and stubborn and even though the film doesn't come out and say it, he may also suffer from some kind of autism or something that keeps him from desiring any social contact unless it's meant to celebrate him, or perhaps he's just introverted to the extreme. The son is more progressive, people are fond of him, and he enjoys the success that his father has always wishes he had. So when a certain prestigious award mistakes one for the other, Uriel is faced with the dilemma of what is the right thing to do. After he makes his decision, his father goes off and discredits his son's work. It's a pretty sad and tough family dynamics, if you think about it, because on the father's case, it's envy that turns into bitterness that turns into gloat, on the son's side it's wanting to live up to his father that turns into generosity that turns into feelings betrayed. Writer/director Cedar designs it so that things would escalate to the point where there is no other option but to openly confront each other, although oddly enough, the film never gives us that luxury.

The comedy aspect of it is very enjoyable, Cedar takes us through awkward room sizes and you'll get the giggles from watching Elizer putting on his giant headset, shutting everything around him down just to get some silence, and for the old professors roles, Cedar casts actors who look just like the stereotype, they look unintentionally amusing. Embedded in the competition is also a the theme of whether or not you are your father's son or if you are your own person. Uriel seems distraught and offended when his own son doesn't make any effort to win his love, like he used to do with his own father. Both Eliezer and Uriel are obsessed with the idea that success can only be found in one's achievements and accomplishments and the recognition from your peers, and how one can be better at that than everybody else, so much so that they're missing out one what's truly important, each other. I think FOOTNOTE is a very unique family dynamics film that deserves attention at the very least.

-- www.Ramascreen.com --

I would like to keep this note very short. A lot of useful reviews have already been posted on this film. The only thing that I would like to comment upon, is the ending.

I believe the ending makes a lot of sense. It actually summarizes the complete concept of the movie. It makes you think about how the relationship between the father and the son will continue. It also reflects how their relationship will impact the further evolution of the family. The tension, the secrets, how will they evolve further ... It expresses that family values can go very deep. A son who has deep respect of his father, and a father, who got blind of his own frustrations, not seeing this respect. And when he finally finds out the love of his son, he ... See the film yourself. Then read back what i wrote here ...

If the ending would have been different, it would have ruined the film.

Sven

A middle-aged man and his father are both professors of Talmudic research at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. There are bad feelings as the younger man has received more praise than his father in their respective careers.

The film has a major challenge: how to make the subject of academia interesting to a majority of viewers who are not academic. This limitation shows at times especially in dialogues of details of the research.

Luckily, the film works quite well within these limitations especially with two major scenes. One involves a confrontational meeting that is called to deal with a major gaffe. The scene is so well played (especially by actor Lior Ashkenazi, seen in many Israeli films) that it even has a thriller quality to it. The other scene includes a shocking betrayal.

With these powerful scenes and the usage of clever directing techniques, this film does well in drawing interest to a subject that would otherwise have had limited appeal. - dbamateurcritic

Intriguing and intelligent comedy. I enjoyed watching it, although the ending was somewhat disappointing. The script is well written and has good moments of humor and sarcasm. Congratulations to your creators. I recommend it to everyone.

'Footnote' didn't really do it for me. The slow start was hindering early on, specifically that very first scene where we just linger on Eliezer and Uriel; I get why, it just didn't work in getting me hooked. I found the characters kinda unlikeable too; by design but still.

I don't need to like characters, but if they aren't the most watchable in that department then they need to be interesting - the main bunch, although this element does improve (as the film does itself) as the run time ticks on, aren't all that noteworthy to see onscreen.

The second half of the movie is most certainly the better portion. Not only does the aforementioned get better (albeit not enough to make me say I enjoyed this) but the editing and score gets pretty lively. The subtle humour scattered in, mostly at the start actually, is decent too.

Acting-wise, Shlomo Bar-Aba and Lior Ashkenazi are OK - two I could see myself liking in a different flick. I do like what the movie attempts to say and on paper it is interesting. This is evidently a well liked film, so who am I to say otherwise? I didn't dislike it, it's just not for me.

It is to explain to depth the claim in the healine. As an israeli, I can admit that there are many bad israeli movies, but slso many good ones.

Footnote is not just good. It is amazing, and can be compared to any movie, not just israelis. It is smart, touching, played and directed wonderfully, funny and sad, and full of details and characters.

It is really one of the best portrayals of Israel and Jerusalem and its academic life. But it is also a humane and universal movie that anyone can enjoy.